Idealism vs. Realism

Posted on 09.03.06 in Faith and there are 20 comments.

Where do you draw the line between idealism and realism?

Lately we’ve had several discussions here about marketing. There was the discussion about Leigh Nash and Automated friendship and then more recently we’ve been talking about the (not quite) Free Derek Webb promotion. Now Shaun Groves has confessed (he calls it a confession) to using a program to automate his MySpace friend requests and comments.

I’ve been trying to figure out what I think about all this. I know it all seems trivial and you’re probably thinking, “What’s the big deal, Kat?”

Well, I don’t know. That’s what I’m trying to figure out.

I just don’t think any of these marketing methods are ideal. Effective....yes. Ideal....no.

Ideally, I think that we as Christians should seek to be above reproach in all we do. We should seek to be sincere and truthful in every aspect of who we are. We should take the high road and steer clear of the grey areas or questionable actions.

But what happens when insincerity is acceptable to our audience? What happens when slight manipulations or deceits are common practice? What happens when no one cares if we step into the grey areas?

Now, please don’t think that I’m just railing on these three artists. I’m not. Granted these discussions have been a catalyst for this post, but before you think I’m throwing stones I have a few facts for you to read:
1. I’ve been known to sneak snacks into the movie theater.
2. I often drive 3-5 miles over the speed limit.
3. My real name isn’t Kat.

Realistically, not many people care about Myspace programs or submitting email addresses to get a cd.

Realistically, both of those marketing promotions have drastically increased the exposure of artists whose desire it is to lead people to Jesus.

Realistically, no one really cares (except maybe me...)

So where do we go from here? Where do we draw the line between idealism and realism? Do you think the grey areas are acceptable...or even actually grey?

Is what we’re doing fine? If not, how do we stick to our ideals and still get our message out?

The Comments:

Skip to comment form

Idealism is what makes us Christians tell our teens to not drink/do drugs/have sex/etc. when “reality” tells us that they will do it anyway (afterall, that’s what teens do) and wouldn’t it be better if they did it under our watchful eyes rather than behind our backs.

Me, I’m pretty idealistic - not much of a gray area believer.  I do my best to leave room for the next new idea to come around the bend and how it might be used for God’s glory.  But, sometimes I see things done to be more “mass marketable” but with a dishonest veneer that, to me, stains the whole process.

Anything coming through MySpace simply must be viewed with a eye on marketing motivation.  I don’t think the various mass friend requests are perfect but it is how the system set itself up.  As long as they don’t pretend to be anything but what they are (i.e. feigning a intimate, personal message but sending it to thousands) then they do what they have been allowed and do so above the board.  Again, the key is openness and honesty about what you do - Shaun seems to be seeking to do this by his confession (transparency).

Now, I say that I’m not much of a gray-area person, but I sin and I justify my own actions.  I place myself in self-defined gray areas.  Sometimes, I will loose track of what is of God and what is of me.  How can I then comdemn?

I often question the idealism/realism view of the ways in which we try to reach people for God; in the ways we strive to be both relevant and meaningful.  I ask “Why spend tons of money on entertainment when it could be used in so many other ways to teach and touch people?” I can say what I like and don’t like easily, but as I can also see what is good and bad in my own life.  But to say what is good and bad in the actions of others I find to be much harder.  I, too, am left conflicted; yet, I don’t keep my yap shut when I see things going on.

(Sorry for a reply almost as long as the original post.)

Well, I’ve had my coffee and I am already feeling bad about that last rant.  Apologies if that was too harsh and gripy. 

I should mention on a positive note that we met with Bethany Dillon on time after a concert.  I watched her graciously meet every person she could after her concert even though she had spent a night without sleep because the airconditioner went out in the bus.  She was tired, exhausted but she pushed through it and met with the locals to the folks who drove 8 hours with their young girls to see her sing.  She was amazing.

Here’s what I said over on Shlog:

“I must say, I’m not nuts about it. I know that interns handle most label musician’s sites. But that’s what makes indie artists and others who do handle their own stuff so much cooler. And I know how much you do interact with your audience. So I would hope that if you sent me a friend request, it would be coming from you. I don’t mean to be critical when I say, I wouldn’t expect Chris Martin to personally send me a friend request, but I would expect it from you. That’s why you won’t find Coldplay among my friends. I’m marketed to enough in life. I don’t want it on forums in which I keep in touch with friends. It’s sort of like having to listen to a commercial before my phone will connect me with the friend I’m calling.”

I don’t like it.  It looks too much like the artist is actually interacting with fans.  It feels deceptive.  If you’re not going to interact with your audience like that, it’s fine! But it’s not fine to make it appear that you are interacting with them.

I think I’m with you on this one.  I can list a bunch of reasons that I don’t like it.  No one of them is a dagger to the heart, but the whole thing just feels creepy.  And I don’t like it.  Am I misinterpreting you?

Euphrony,
You’re right that transparency is the key. I appreciate Shaun’s honesty about it all.

Cachinnator,
No you’re not misinterpreting me. There’s just something that doesn’t sit right with me about it. I’d love to see Christian artists use marketing methods that are entirely above reproach and don’t require justification. Then again, I’m not trying to support my family by selling albums.

Of course, Curtis recently pointed out that it’s actually against MySpace’s Terms of Service, so I think that pretty much is the final point.

Seth,
I do have to say that Bethany Dillon is by far one of my favorite artists. As a parent, I’m so encouraged and challenged to see a teenager who is so mature and passionate about God. It’s wonderful to really know that my girls don’t have to grow up to be average American teens - that they can far exceed that expectation.

Honestly, as a believer, I’m incredibly challenged by the journal entries on her site. She has a hunger for the scriptures that far exceeds just about anyone I know.

If you haven’t checked out her site or read her journals, I highly recommend it.

I don’t like it.  It looks too much like the artist is actually interacting with fans.  It feels deceptive.  If you’re not going to interact with your audience like that, it’s fine! But it’s not fine to make it appear that you are interacting with them.

Not sure if I’m an object of this comment but if I even might be I need to clarify.

I DO interact with my fans.  I read and return my own fan mail, in my inbox and on my myspace page.  I return it all.  I spend more time to talking to fans each week than singing for them.

The only thing - THE ONLY THING - that is automated about my career is the requesting of fans/friends on myspace.  A few things to remember about this automation process:

1) They don’t have to accept the invitation.
2) This process allows me to inform specific kinds of people in specific places about my music, WHICH cuts down on work time (giving me more time for doing what I’m sure everyone, you and my family, would like me to be doing: living, ministering and making music). AND this is done cheaply ($60 one time fee) so my money can go also to more important things.
3) The age group I’m soliciting “friendship” from on myspace is selected by me and is 19-30 - a demographic that so far has understood and excused what it is I’m doing.  Translation: they’re used to this and cool with it. (Should they be?  Don’t know.) (THe only folks who’ve been angered by my automated requests have been Europeans.  Go figure.)

Am I just rationalizing here or what?  Be honest.

So, yea I’m thinking about whether I should or shouldn’t do this but not on moral grounds - it’s not dishonest and it is an opt in relationship for “Friends” of mine on myspace.

btw, Kat, you mention in your piece on Leigh (well done) that her peeps want you as a friend so they can spam your comment section.  Not so.  They don’t need you as a friend to do that.  They can spam anyone’s comment section - friend or not.

The value of friends seems to be the same as names on an e-mail list.  It allows direct communication to happen.  I can send mail to your inbox if you’re my friend and can’t if you’re not.  Having my face on a friend’s page is also one more incoming link.  (Not sure how many of them are clicked on but it’s there...) Other than that there’s nothing a friends on myspace benefits Leigh than a non-friend.

Shaun

I know Shaun interacts with his fans and does send out his own email and everything.  Mabye that’s why this one thing doesn’t sit well with me.  It seems out of character.  And I know he wouldn’t have time to do all those invites himself.  I don’t know.  Like I said, I don’t really have a silver bullet in this discussion for why I feel what I do.  If it helps any, this isn’t something I feel overly strongly about.  My objection is mild at best.  Mild and fuzzy.  I feel so milquetoast right now.  Ugh.  I’m soggy on this one.

cach, nice use of the word “milquetoast”.  It’s not pulled out very often these days.

And I would echo your thoughts; the reason I started lurking and then participating at Shlog was because Shaun was involved - not some intern thumbing through his journal and posting random excerpts.

I guess I’m sort of conflicted about this whole thing, too. I don’t think I’m quite as uneasy about it all as Cach and Euphrony (and Kat, I think) seem to be.

As for artists on MySpace who have you listed as their “Friends"… is it their fault that the creators of MySpace chose to use the word “Friends”? What if they set it up so that for the musician sites, the word is “Fans”? Wouldn’t that make it more honest and realistic? “Shaun Groves has 6,549 Fans on MySpace”.

Then it would be “Friends” for “personal” MySpace accounts and “Fans” for Musician or Actor or Celebrity sites. I know lots of people, including myself, who have gotten in touch with old friends through MySpace. That has nothing to do with marketing, or music, or being faked out, or whatever. It just means taking a centralized gathering point and utilizing it as a tool. Artists and others are doing the same thing. As long as they are working legally, within the parameters set forth by the web site operators, I don’t feel the need to be overly legalistic about the “appearance” of what they are doing.

If we’re concerned because it “looks like the artist is actually interacting with fans”, then what do we call it when an artist is interviewed on the radio and the host takes some phone calls from fans? There might be 5,000 people listening at that moment, and a total of 5 get through and actually get to talk to the artist. But it makes them seem “real”, makes them look accessible to ordinary people.

As far as automated marketing practices on MySpace—I don’t know. If their Terms of Service prohibit that, they either need to change their ToS to reflect reality or enforce it, which shouldn’t really be too hard (500 personal messages sent from a single user in less than an hour—c’mon, it’s blatant).

We live in a consumer-oriented, market-driven system. That’s the reality of our political and financial system, and that’s the reality of the dominant paradigm in which we think and act as Americans. We are really just shaking our fists in the wind and cursing it for blowing if we’re going to fuss about marketing. Marketing is how the producer meets the consumer. Ideas, art, Ronco Widgets, or rabbit pelts… if you have it and you want others to have access to it, they have to know about it. In our system, the farmer’s small vegetable stand in the village is no more sacred than the lady with GoldenPalace.com tattooed on her forehead.

Now I realize that I’ve completely dodged or missed the real point here, because you’re talking about all this in the context of being a Christ-follower, and of having morals, ethics, and standards that are above reproach. But since nobody can seem to come up with much beyond a fuzzy discomfort with the whole thing, I wonder if it’s not something like an overall dirty feeling about consumerism and marketing in general.

Is it possible that in this instance, we’re trying to put limits and boundaries on people, in the name of the Lord, when those people are engaging in activities which are really just functions of the system of which we are part? I don’t know.

I’ll be honest that it is hard to nail down the bad feelings I have about MySpace.  It’s not just their misuse of the term “friend”; it’s not just the rampant ads and marketing (everyone has ads, and I block them all); it’s not just the uses to which some people put their sites (the same nefarious stuff goes on in Blogger, Facebook, b-boards, everywhere); it seems to be more a combination of everything and how MySpace is run.  In my first comment here, I said I am an idealist; but I cannot and will not condemn Shaun or anyone else for using MySpace the way they have set it up and allow - as long as they are honest and not deceptive in their practices.

On Shaun’s thread on this topic, I referred to the dichotomous nature of MySpace.  They seem unwilling to address this.  Hammer, you suggest that they come up with a new term - Fans - and I agree.  The business and personal aspects of the site need to be better separated.  But, how can they do this now after it has been so enmeshed?  Right now, it is like going to a party at a friend’s house - you mingle, see some old friends, meet a few new people, and then discover that you’re talking to a marketing agent for Sony.  You may get mad at your friend for inviting you to a party to be sold something.  But, if you went to the party and were told that over there was a guy with info/merchandise for a favorite artist you would probably go talk to him on your own.  The big difference to me is the up-front honesty.

If MySpace is going to allow practices such as mass automated friend requests, music sales, etc. then they need to change their rules to state the ways in which such practices are allowed, require some type of notification that you were pinged because of certain profile characteristics, tell users their profiles will be used for targeted marketing, and possibly allow for people to opt out of the business side of MySpace (but, as they opt out of being contacted, they will also opt out of their choice to enter a musician’s site - be fair, either you’re in or out of the business side).

To the morality of all this, I see some distinctions.  Again, it comes down to being honest in your practices.  I think that some are being honest in their use of MySpace and the automated friendship.  But others are not - they do not taint the whole system, they taint themselves.  I think Derek Webb’s team was dishonest in marketing “Free Derek Webb”.  I think the guy cachinnator highlighted a few days ago who told Amy Grant she might just make it big one day while advertising his own music was being dishonest.  I’m not just harping on these people, or on MySpace; I’ve seen my own church do this several times recently and it seriously irks me and saddens me.  If we, as Christ’s followers, cannot be known for our honesty and trustworthiness, then how can our message of salvation be accepted?

Sorry, I’ve been going on a bit.  I’m not ranting, because I’m not angry.  I’m just trying to express what I believe, and it requires a few words to do so.

Shaun,
I certainly don’t think anyone could question your involvement with your audience, your honesty or your sincerity. You’re certainly the most accessible artist I’ve come across.

My issues with Myspace Automated friend programs comes down to two issues:

1. Spam - Unrequested information or contact is spam. Whether that comes in the mailbox, in my email inbox or at dinner on the phone - it’s annoying and rude. It wastes other people’s time. What if every Christian artist used a program and sent a friend request to every person 19-30 within 200 miles of Nashville?

Now if an artist just sends friend requests to those who have them listed as their favorite artist or who play their music on their page, that’s different, they have a lead. Otherwise, I just see it as spam. If you all see it differently, then please explain. I’m listening. Really.

2. I guess the bottom line, though is that it’s apparently against the Myspace TOS.

Shaun,
I also wanted to mention and make sure you know that I applaud you for being honest about using the program and really trying to make the best decision about whether to continue using it.

Here’s my plug for you:
If you don’t already own Shaun’s music, buy it here.

If you don’t already read his blog, read it here.

If you don’t already subscribe to his RSS feed, subscribe here.

Aww shuck.

a few things…

1) I’m checking with myspace to see if this program I’m using is a violation of their rules.  Until I find out, I’m not using it.

2) There is so much fake in the music business you “fans” aren’t aware of that is very similar to this myspace situation, or worse.  For instance, I do radio interviews routinely from my home phone.  The DJs routinely play them days or even weeks later on the air as if they are “live.” “Shaun is with us this morning.” “Shaun will be in concert tonight” Fake.  Radio interviews are almost NEVER actually live.  Those DJS announcing songs are often canned.  DOVE awards are block voted upon by labels and managers making deals with each other prior to voting time.  Nothing is what it seems.  So, it’s not an excuse, but I guess relative to all the truly deceitful stuff going on in Nashville (the stuff I know about), my myspace bot didn’t seem so bad.

I’m rethinking that now.  It’s been educational to eavesdrop on the conversation here in the process.

Thanks for that.

-Shaun

See?  That’s why we do this.  And coincidentally, that’s why we all seem to like Shaun.  For lack of a better word, it’s that ‘transparency’ thing.  Like I said, I can’t even pin down a solid reason why I’m uneasy about this issue.  Still, he takes people seriously enough to care what we think.  That’s why he posted it on his blog; that’s why he’s participated here.  That’s different.

I totally support Shaun’s decision to hold off until the rules issue is cleared up, but assuming there is no violation, I wouldn’t tell him to stop doing the mass invites.  Hammer and Euprhony both phrased it in interesting ways.  I don’t think it’s just ‘marketing’ that I’m uncomfortable with.  I’m in marketing!  And clearly, this is a more nuanced issue than we’re debating.

At any rate, I hope the concerts are very well-attended, the album comes off great, and the new website rocks.

...well, of course the new website is going to rock…

I read over the MySpace TOS, and sure enough just like Curtis said, it is there in black and white - any automated use of the system, such as using scripts to add friends or send comments or messages is prohibited.  However, they also prohibit sexually explicit of “suggestive” material, hate language, and a slew of other things.  The TOS implicitly states that these activities will not be actively policed or enforced.  I’m no legal expert, but I believe this leaves them on rather shaky ground when they selectively begin to enforce the rules.  All this is to say that while what Shaun and others have been doing with automated messages is against the written TOS, MySpace may have placed themselves in a position where they cannot enforce their own rules because they have not been enforcing the rules - a de facto law is in place that usurps the written agreement.

I have some family in the music biz, and here’s what they said about their Friend Adder experience:

We shut down our Friend Adder about three weeks ago.  I wrote a certified letter to the MySpace legal department about two months ago asking them if it was ok to use the Friend Adder.  The legal department wrote me back about a month ago and told me that I am not allowed to use the Friend Adder and that I should encourage others to refrain from using it as well.

So, Shaun and others, consider yourself encouraged.

Well, late to the party as usual.  And positively reeling to find that you’re not really a Kat, Kat.

“"I’m marketed to enough in life."”

I think that is the real crux of it for me.  I’ve been reading a lot in the last six months or so about my generation, gen x, and the next, the millenials.  And a big common denominator is the fact that we’ve been marketed half to death from the cradle.  As a general rule, we can sniff out a “pitch” a mile off. 

Reminds me of a memorable article by Keith Giles on ginkworld.

I’m so sorry, Kat. I should have broken the news to you personally first. 

I do have to say, though, that I spend so much of my time calling myself Kat that the other day I met a Kat at church and when she said, “Hi, my name is Kat.” I almost said,"Me too!”

Then I remembered it’s not.

I’m getting confused.

That’s a very interesting article, by the way. That movie quote is a good foundation for a blog post…

Share Your Comments:

Name:

Email:

URL (optional):

Smileys

Remember me.

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Submit the word you see below:

My Twitter Posts